Legal Opinion
Duncan v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board
California Court of Appeal
Decided December 23, 1983No. AO022203PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
NEWSOM, J.
We granted a writ of review in order to determine whether the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (board) properly applied the “going and coming rule” and the “personal comfort doctrine.” Concluding that the board erred in its decision to deny compensation, we annul its order.
In relevant part the factual background is as follows.
Ida Mae Duncan worked for Greyhound Temporary Personnel (Greyhound) as the bookkeeping manager of its San Francisco office. She was a salaried employee, paid for an eight and one-half hour workday during which she was supposed to have two short breaks…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Western Pipe & Steel Co. v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
- State Compensation Insurance Fund v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
- Union Camp Corporation v. BlackmonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1972
- Western Greyhound Lines v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
- Fremont Indem. Co. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.California Court of Appeal · 1977
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Davis v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2001
- Hill v. General Metal Heat Treating, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1988
- Hinkle v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1985
- McFadden v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988
- Wood Pontiac Cadillac v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992